Pot debate should come to the fore

Sunday

Feb 24, 2013 at 3:15 AM

As the saying goes, there is nothing certain other than death and taxes. However, there are things that may be inevitable. Such has been the drive to recognize gay marriage and to come to terms with the notion that abortion is here to stay.

But the list doesn't necessarily end there.

Now with a handful of bills getting due consideration in the New Hampshire Legislature to legalize the use of marijuana, we have to wonder if inevitability has grabbed hold now that the “flower power” generation is taking charge.

State Rep. Steve Vaillancourt tells us that by a 16-3 vote the House Criminal Justice Committee voted to retain House Bill 492 regarding the legalization and regulation of marijuana. That means, says Vaillancourt, the committee will hold the bill for work over the summer for study, as opposed to outright killing it. Meanwhile two other attempts to legalize pot are pending.

Were New Hampshire an island unto itself, we would be slow to suggest that some level of legalization is in the offing. But like other trends once thought unthinkable, the notion of tolerance and acceptance of personal pot use is growing nationwide. In Massachusetts, it is a violation — like getting a traffic ticket. Last year the states of Washington and Colorado signed off on legal pot use and more are expected to follow suit.

According to author Tim Dickinson, “As many as 58 percent of Americans now believe marijuana should be legal. And our political establishment is catching on. Former President Jimmy Carter came out this month (December 2012) and endorsed taxed-and-regulated weed. 'I'm in favor of it,' Carter said. 'I think it's OK.'”

Even the Obama administration has seemingly taken recreational pot use off the agenda at the federal level, telling 20/20s Barbara Walters, “We've got bigger fish to fry.”

The words written here are not being used to advocate legalization. But there needs to be a serious conversation that hopefully HB 492 and other bills will foster. A number of those issues were touched upon during testimony by Richard N. Van Wickler, superintendent of the Cheshire County Department of Corrections (although he did not testify in that capacity). Among the questions he sought to address were:

Is what we are doing effective toward creating a drug free society, which is the stated mission of our drug laws?

Has crime been reduced because of our current policies?

Are we safer as a community because of our current policies?

Are the costs of incarceration and surveillance justified?

The issue of incarceration, in particular, hits home here in New Hampshire as the Legislature and governor consider hiring a private firm to run a men's prison and ponder the fate of a $38 million state women's prison included in Gov. Maggie Hassan's budget. Also of concern is a lack of unified standards from one county to the next in prosecuting marijuana offenses, a notion given the nod by one Corrections Department official with which we spoke on background.

All in all, there is much to be hashed out by the Legislature and a generation of voters which appears to be more libertarian when it comes to drug laws. To that end we urge the Legislature to truly study the goals of HB 492 other bills looking to address many of the thorny issues raised by Wickler and others.

Mr. Chairman, Honorable committee, my name is Richard Van Wickler. I am a life long resident of NH and have served the last 24 years in law enforcement and continue to do so as the Superintendent of the Cheshire County Department of Corrections. I DO NOT represent Cheshire County here today. I have taken vacation to be here in order to testify as a member of LAW ENFORCEMENT AGAINST PROHIBITION. LEAP is a nonprofit organization consisting of Law Enforcement Officers, Judges and Corrections Professionals who oppose the current “War on Drugs” policy.

House Bill 492 is smart and responsible legislation and I speak in favor of this Bill.

To begin my testimony, it must be clear that I DO NOT advocate the use of alcohol, tobacco, marijuana or nonprescribed drugs.

This discussion, and this Bill, is about our drug policy and the effects of that policy. In considering drug policy in our State and in our Nation, we must ask ourselves the following questions:

Is what we are doing effective toward creating a drug free society, which is the stated mission of our drug laws?

Has crime been reduced because of our current policies?

Are we safer as a community because of our current policies?

Are the costs of incarceration and surveillance justified?

Criminal justice policy should be about promoting public safety and preventing crime. Our current policies do NOT achieve this. In my study of Drug War policy I utilize government-produced data that was funded by our tax dollars and also reputable research from widely accepted sources to reach my conclusion. As for a policy that protects our citizens consider that each year in the U.S. alone:

Tobacco kills 435,000 people

Poor diet and physical inactivity kill 365,000 people

Alcohol kills 85,000

Motor vehicle crashes kill over 26,000

The illicit use of illegal drugs kills 17,000

(Journal of American Medicine 2004)

The Drug Enforcement Agency has indicated that 75% of Gang War violence is over “illegal drug marketplace” disputes. The violence associated with drug use in our Country is not because of the substances but because of the PROHIBITION of those substances.

The U.S. incarcerates more people than any other Country having 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's inmates. We now have 2.7 million behind bars and over 7 million people in our correctional system. Consider that 114 million Americans have admitted to using an illegal drug in their lifetime and 34 million have admitted to using in the last 12 months. The majority, by far, is for the use of marijuana. Taking this in to consideration and assuming that we can “arrest our way out of this” — then we must increase our National jail bed space of 2.4 million jail beds to at least 35 million jail beds! Unfortunately, our current correctional system has become one that we can no longer afford.

A vote in favor of this Bill does the following:

1. It is a vote to end discrimination against harmless people

2. It is a vote to put illegal drug dealers out of business

3. It is a vote to reduce crime

4. It is a vote to increase public safety

5. It is a vote to more wisely spend criminal justice resources

6. It is a vote to earn revenue that is fair and widely accepted among the constituency

7. It is a vote that is responsible and smart, which is based on solid evidence

8. It is a vote that will greatly assist in keeping it OUT of the hands of minors because it is regulated and controlled and more difficult for minors to access.

A vote in FAVOR of this Bill DOES NOT do the following:

1. It DOES NOT endorse the use of drugs any more than we currently endorse the use of alcohol or tobacco

2. It WILL NOT increase the use of drugs by individuals who currently have no desire to use it

Retired Judge James Gray of Orange County California said that his three decades on the front lines of this issue has convinced him that our approach is not working and that our marijuana policy must change in order to achieve the following goals:

Reduce marijuana consumption by children

Stop or reduce the violence and corruption that accompanies the growing and distribution of marijuana

Stop or reduce crime both by people trying to get money to purchase marijuana and by those under its influence

Reduce the harm to people who consume marijuana

Reduce the number of people we must put into our jails and prisons

Latest polls show that 76% of the constituency and 67% of our Nation's Police Chiefs agree with this.

In the interest of time — I won't go on with the endless list of unsubstantiated reasons that opponents will give. I will tell you that there is no evidence to support the claims that they make.

In summary, our Country will spend approximately 88 Billion dollars this year in yet another attempt to create a drug free society and we will fail. When we incarcerate a rapist, bank robber or other “mala in se” criminal, the crimes that they were committing stop, hence the incapacitation effect of incarceration. When we incarcerate a drug dealer, we simply create a job opportunity for another individual who will step in and keep the illegal supply and unregulated revenue stream coming in.

Our policies on Drugs should seek to reduce death, disease, crime and addiction. Our current policies achieve none of these goals. This legislation goes a long way toward reducing all of the current harms associated with prohibition.

Please consider the facts and honor the evidence.

As a voter I am hopeful that anyone, be it the House, Senate or Governor, in opposition to this Bill will do the responsible thing and provide solid and sound reasoning for his or her actions. To just say “NO” is ineffective and irresponsible to the citizens of New Hampshire.

This is responsible legislation, and I encourage its passage.

Thank you for the privilege to testify before you today.

Richard N. Van Wickler

Never miss a story

Choose the plan that's right for you.
Digital access or digital and print delivery.